Skip to content

Run pod repo update in iOS extension test #73442

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
jmagman merged 1 commit into from
Jan 7, 2021
Merged

Run pod repo update in iOS extension test #73442

jmagman merged 1 commit into from
Jan 7, 2021

Conversation

@jmagman
Copy link
Member

@jmagman jmagman commented Jan 7, 2021 •
edited
Loading

In a PR I updated an integration test pod to version EFQRCode=6.0 released 2020-11-04, and the test succeeded on my machine but failed in the devicelab.

stdout:     Resolving dependencies of `Podfile`
stdout:       CDN: trunk Relative path: CocoaPods-version.yml exists! Returning local because checking is only perfomed in repo update
stdout:       CDN: trunk Relative path: all_pods_versions_9_f_5.txt exists! Returning local because checking is only perfomed in repo update
2021-01-06T14:45:02.365845: stdout:       CDN: trunk Relative path: Specs/9/f/5/EFQRCode/5.1.7/EFQRCode.podspec.json exists! Returning local because checking is only perfomed in repo update
stdout:     [!] CocoaPods could not find compatible versions for pod "EFQRCode":
stdout:       In Podfile:
stdout:         EFQRCode (= 6.0)
stdout: 
stdout:     None of your spec sources contain a spec satisfying the dependency: `EFQRCode (= 6.0)`.
stdout: 
stdout:     You have either:
stdout:      * out-of-date source repos which you can update with `pod repo update` or with `pod install --repo-update`.
stdout:      * mistyped the name or version.
stdout:      * not added the source repo that hosts the Podspec to your Podfile.

I'm not sure why the CocoaPods specs repo is so far out of date. Run pod repo update before the integration test to update the snapshot.

Original PR:
#72761

Revert due to test failure:
#73437

@jmagman jmagman added c: contributor-productivity Team-specific productivity, code health, technical debt. platform-ios iOS applications specifically labels Jan 7, 2021
@jmagman jmagman self-assigned this Jan 7, 2021
@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes label Jan 7, 2021
@jmagman jmagman requested a review from xster January 7, 2021 19:51
xster
xster approved these changes Jan 7, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@xster xster left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know if this takes longer than running git pull in the spec repo. Maybe the infra team can just run this manually once also on all the machines.

@jmagman
Copy link
Member Author

jmagman commented Jan 7, 2021

I don't know if this takes longer than running git pull in the spec repo. Maybe the infra team can just run this manually once also on all the machines.

It takes <2 seconds on my machine, though it will take longer the first time it runs on every devicelab agent. I can remove it if it causes us problems.

@jmagman jmagman merged commit b78b176 into flutter:master Jan 7, 2021
@jmagman jmagman deleted the repo-update branch January 7, 2021 19:59
@jmagman jmagman mentioned this pull request Jan 7, 2021
Merged
10 tasks
@jmagman jmagman added the a: tests "flutter test", flutter_test, or one of our tests label Aug 20, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@xster xster xster approved these changes

@christopherfujino christopherfujino Awaiting requested review from christopherfujino

Assignees

@jmagman jmagman

Labels

a: tests "flutter test", flutter_test, or one of our tests c: contributor-productivity Team-specific productivity, code health, technical debt. platform-ios iOS applications specifically

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@jmagman @xster